DOD's flawed estimate topic of hearing today

Dec. 12, 2007

An aerial view of part of Fort Monmouth, targeted for closing by the Pentagon. / (PRESS FILE PHOTO)

Written by

KEITH BROWN

and BILL BOWMAN

WASHINGTON — Shutting down Fort Monmouth will cost the Defense Department more than closing any other installation on the Pentagon's 2005 hit list, according to the results of a federal investigation released Tuesday.

The Government Accountability Office released the results of a long-awaited investigation into the skyrocketing costs of the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure process that recommended closing the 90-year-old Army post.

The GAO found that the overall cost of the Pentagon's nationwide effort to streamline the military and save money has increased $10 billion — from $21 billion to $31 billion — since 2005. It also found that the Defense Department will save less than half, or $15 billion, of the $36 billion it originally estimated.

The report also said it may be impossible for the DOD to meet the 2011 deadline to have all 182 recommendations completed, given the complexity of the consolidations.

The cost to shutter Fort Monmouth — the largest Army post to be closed during the two-year-old consolidation — has increased 87 percent, from around $780 million to nearly $1.5 billion, since the 2005 decision to close it, according to the report.

"It (the GAO report) confirms what we've been saying all along — the cost of this move is going to be horrendous, and that the savings are much less and that it's going to take a longer time than estimated to make the move because of all the changes that have to be made," said Rep. Frank J. Pallone Jr., D-N.J.

Pallone was one among a chorus of Shore area lawmakers who called for the GAO to investigate shutdown costs following an ongoing Asbury Park Press investigation that first revealed in June that the cost to close the post had nearly doubled. The GAO's findings are in line with that investigation, which also revealed the 48 percent jump in cost of the 2005 round overall.

"The report solidifies what we've been saying since February, and it vindicates what the Press has been reporting all along," said John Poitras, president of the American Federation of Government Employees Local 1904. AFGE represents many non-military workers at the fort.

The union has brought suit against the Defense Department, the BRAC commission and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to halt the closure of the fort. The case is pending in federal court.

"We knew the cost overruns in BRAC were serious, but an almost 50 percent increase is outrageous," said Rep. Rush D. Holt, D-N.J. in an e-mail statement. "The flawed process that produced the flawed decision . . . is finally getting some real scrutiny, and I look forward to conducting oversight of this matter at the hearing."

House panel meets today

The GAO's report was released on the eve of today's congressional hearing into the costs of the latest BRAC round. The hearing, which will have a special focus on the recommendation to close Fort Monmouth, is scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. in Washington before the readiness subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee.

Among the witnesses scheduled to testify is Brian Lepore, director of Defense Capabilities and Management. Lepore authored Tuesday's report. Also on the witness list is Victor Ferlise, a former deputy commander at Fort Monmouth.

The fort, which employs more than 5,000, supports another 22,000 jobs and pumps about $3.2 billion into the state's economy, is scheduled to close in just over three years. Much of its research and development mission is scheduled to be transferred to Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland as a result of the 2005 BRAC round.

"The GAO report raises alarming questions about the BRAC process nationwide and the decision to close Fort Monmouth," said U.S. Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, D-N.J. "Fort Monmouth is now officially the most expensive base closure in the nation and the Department of Defense has some serious questions to answer about its original cost estimates."

The GAO concluded in its report that the Pentagon could erode the public's trust in the BRAC program if it continues to claim savings that the GAO asserts do not exist.

"DOD could create a false sense that BRAC 2005 will result in a much higher dollar savings than will actually be realized to readily fund other priorities," the report says.

Rep. Christopher H. Smith, R-N.J., said his confidence in the BRAC process already is expiring because of the DOD's seeming inability to do proper accounting.

ON THE WEB: Visit our Web site, www.app.com, and look under Special Reports for a link to Battle for Fort Monmouth to see video from the Aberdeen (Md.) Proving Ground; GAO reports; documents from the Department of Defense and Fort Monmouth; letters from elected officials calling for action; Base Realignment and Closure commission documents; past stories; and more, or to join in the online conversation about this topic in Story Chat.